Face guards of various types are known. Many designs of face-guards have been suggested for use in connection with ball sports or sports in which a projectile such as a puck is in play. A basic wire mesh type face guard, connectable to a helmet, is known from US 2009/0083891. The relatively fine gauge mesh of the guard may make it unsuitable for players of sports requiring a less obstructed line of sight between the players and a moving projectile in play. Another example of a face guard can be seen from WO 2009/018442, which shows a hybrid type helmet face mask, wherein the mask incorporates both a visor and a cage and wherein the visor serves to add protection across the field of vision of a wearer, across which the protective cage of the guard is fully open. For many ball sports, the use of visors is not preferred because they tend to increase discomfort as a result of enclosing the user more completely. Moreover, visibility through visors becomes impaired as the visor becomes scratched or soiled. EP 1941807 discloses a guard for a sports helmet in which the cage type guard has a relatively unobstructed viewing aperture, albeit narrow enough not to require an additional visor. In WO 03/056958, a stand-alone cage type cage type face guard which has an unobstructed transverse viewing aperture for both eyes. In U.S. Pat. No. 6,189,156, a helmet has a cage type guard with an open but narrow viewing aperture which is complemented by a visor across the viewing aperture. From the above, it can readily be inferred that many attempts have been made to develop comfortable face protection for sportspeople which provides both good protection while allowing good visibility. As yet, there is no face-guard which provides optimum advantages in both respects. A wider viewing gap tends to improve visibility, while nevertheless increasing the risk that a projectile will force its way through the viewing aperture, even if its dimensions are greater than the viewing aperture dimensions. In such cases, significant injury may result, especially because the viewing aperture is in front of the wearer's eyes.
Additional cage type face guards with viewing apertures are known which co-operate with peaked headgear or helmets. Examples can be seen from WO 2009/090410, AU 20022100570 and AU 2002204672, all of which relate to cricket helmets. The face-guards illustrated in each of these documents, can be described as a jaw type guard because it surrounds the jaw and also the ears of a wearer. The topmost transverse forward struts of jaw-type guards extends below the eye level of a wearer during use. Protection above the level of the eye is provided by virtue of the rigid helmet peak. In US 2009/0044316, US 2007/0250992 there have been attempts to combine a full face guard with a peaked helmet, wherein additional eye level protection is provided by a transverse forward strut above the level of the eye during use. Evidently, the presence of the additional upper transverse strut reduces visibility through the viewing aperture. In US 2007/0250990, an attempt has been made to provide reinforcement to the helmet peak to increase protection above the eye level in connection with a jaw type guard. Because of the increased protection available to players who wear helmets with face guards, the number of serious facial injuries has been reduced. Nevertheless, it is thought that some players feel a sense of invulnerability while wearing head and facial protection and are thereby inclined to attempt to play dangerous balls which they ordinarily would have avoided. In addition, it is thought that some players may be inclined to adjust the width of a viewing gap through their protective headgear to improve their view, even while marginally increasing the risk that a projectile such as a ball might force its way through causing injury.
The present invention seeks to provide an improved face-guard having regard in particular to enhanced protection and minimal visual obstruction.